Differences in oncofertility beliefs, knowledge, and practice between medical oncologists and advanced practice providers: Identifying quality improvement targets.
Authors: Nikita V. Baclig, Amy Sun, Maria A Velez, Adam E. Singer, Daria Louise Gaut, Michael Oh, Caroline Chen, Maria De Lourdes Garcia-Jimenez, John A. Glaspy, Sidharth Anand
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology (2023)

e18747 Background: Despite the deleterious effects of systemic cancer treatment on fertility, many young adult cancer patients do not receive fertility preservation. Historically, oncofertility was discussed by the medical oncologist (MO), but an increasing advanced practice provider (APP) oncology workforce provides opportunities for quality improvement (QI) in oncofertility care. To identify levers for QI interventions, we explored how fertility beliefs, knowledge, and practice of MOs differ from APPs. Methods: MOs and APPs working in inpatient, outpatient, academic and community clinical settings were identified from providers at The Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center (JCCC). Participants completed an online survey prior to a fertility preservation seminar. Survey questions queried beliefs about fertility preservation, knowledge about guideline recommendations, and individual fertility practices in the 3 months prior to survey completion. Responses were collected anonymously through a HIPAA-compliant web platform. Pearson chi-squared and two-sample T tests were used for statistical comparisons between MOs and APPs using STATA v15.1. This study received exempt status from the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) Institutional Review Board. Results: 32 (52.5%) APPs and 29 (47.5%) MOs completed the survey. APPs were younger than MOs (28% vs. 14% were 30-39 years, p = 0.072) and more frequently female (91% vs. 38%, p &lt; 0.001). Practice specialties varied equally between both groups and they had similar distribution of post-training oncology experience. Participants saw an average of 6.0 (APP) and 5.7 (MO) new cancer patients of reproductive age per month. While APPs and MOs reported concern about the effects of cancer treatment on fertility, APPs were more likely to agree with the statement “Offering fertility preservation to patients before cancer therapy compromises their oncological treatment” than MOs (44% vs. 31%, p = 0.047). APPs reported less familiarity with fertility preservation guidelines (scale 0-10, mean 4.3 vs. 5.8, p = 0.013) and MOs were more comfortable discussing specific fertility preservation techniques. There were no significant differences in referral practices. In the 3 months prior to survey, MOs reported having fertility discussions more frequently than APPs (52% vs 28%, p = 0.047) and more regularly had discussions before treatment initiation (97% vs. 78%, p = 0.033). Conclusions: Improving oncofertility care for young cancer patients is an important quality metric. This exploratory study demonstrated significant differences in beliefs, knowledge, and practice between MOs and APPs regarding fertility preservation for cancer patients. These results will shape our future QI initiatives, which will target system, practice, and education with a specific focus on non-MO providers.